{"id":4493,"date":"2012-10-18T16:35:44","date_gmt":"2012-10-18T23:35:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/?p=4493"},"modified":"2013-01-13T00:04:44","modified_gmt":"2013-01-13T08:04:44","slug":"dont-cut-our-pacific-grove-trees-3000-trees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/dont-cut-our-pacific-grove-trees-3000-trees\/","title":{"rendered":"Don’t Chop Down Our Pacific Grove Trees – 3,000 Trees at Immediate Risk"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tree Destruction Effort Led by Kampe and Huitt<\/strong><\/h1>\n

\"Tree<\/a>

Tree Scream: New Law – 3,000 Trees Could be Chopped Down without any Permit in Pacific Grove<\/p><\/div>
\nStumps: Pacific Grove\u2019s Newest Industry<\/strong><\/p>\n

Last night, Wednesday October<\/strong> 17, 2012 four City Council<\/strong> members voted to get rid of protection for trees on all residential property that are not Monterey Cypress, Coast live Oak or Monterey Pine. That loss of protection was estimated at 3,000 trees, but could be as high as 5,600 to 6,000 trees (1).<\/p>\n

The tree destruction law was eagerly led and pushed by Mayor Candidate Bill Kampe.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mayor Carmelita Garcia voted against this tree destruction when she was stunned to learn it would mean a death warrant for at least 3,000 trees as soon as next week.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Pacific Grove has lost about half of its trees since 1986 \u2013 which is just short while ago in tree years.<\/p>\n

You might think a town with reverence for trees in its very own name would try to stop that crisis. But no, Pacific Grove now joins Seaside in a race to see which town can remove all trees first.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The canopy was down to only 33% in 1986 because the first two-thirds were cut down in the previous 100 years. We only have 19 percent left today. This is because more than 700 trees a year are chopped down every year because City Staff<\/strong> refused to enforce the law. Few trees are planted; fewer still survive.<\/p>\n

For more than half a Century all trees on residential land in Pacific Grove were protected. As of today only native trees are protected \u2013 and oh by the way the Council specifically excluded our native Redwoods from the definition of native trees; meaning magnificent Giant Redwoods can be cut without a permit.<\/strong><\/p>\n

You know those beautiful huge Redwoods all over town and the towering Douglas Firs? Owners won\u2019t even need a permit to chop them down – even when they are perfectly healthy.<\/strong> Worse yet, it is now cheaper to cut a tree down without a permit (only a $100 fine) \u2013 than to get a permit.<\/p>\n

Huitt believes We have to Destroy the Forest to Improve It<\/h1>\n

Councilman Huitt<\/strong> showed no remorse in voting to destroy the trees. He tried to persuade himself that somehow by allowing more trees to get cut (more than the 700+ trees we lose every year) and eliminating meaningful penalties for logging without a permit \u2014 the new ordinance \u201cshould improve our forest.\u201d (His opponent Councilman and Candidate Dan Miller voted against the tree harming law.)<\/strong><\/p>\n

If you love trees \u2013 you can return their favors \u2013 Vote NO on Kampe and Huitt<\/p>\n

Notes:
\n1. The tree loss estimate was not done in the CEQA<\/strong> environmental analysis – it was done “seat of the pants” during the 2nd reading at the Council meeting – after public comment was closed.<\/p>\n

City Planner Hardgrave<\/strong> estimated that the city has some 25,000 trees and 25 percent of Pacific Grove trees \/ tree canopy are non-native. This resulted in a discussion of some 3,000 trees that could be cut down without a permit.<\/p>\n

The CEQA<\/strong> analysis was essentially worthless on this point because the project changed at the last minute. There was no estimate of the tree loss due to the last minute change just before the Council meeting of Sept 2012. The project changed from protecting (requiring a permit) for all tree chopping on residential land to allowing cutting down all non-native trees on residential land.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Tree Destruction Effort Led by Kampe and Huitt Stumps: Pacific Grove\u2019s Newest Industry Last night, Wednesday October 17, 2012 four City Council members voted to get rid of protection for trees on all residential property that are not Monterey Cypress, … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":2,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4493","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4493","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4493"}],"version-history":[{"count":30,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4493\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4498,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4493\/revisions\/4498"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4493"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4493"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/daviddilworth.com\/pol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4493"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}